DILIP GUPTA, J. - (1.) THE petitioner seeks the quashing of the order dated 15th May, 2008 by which his claim for compassionate appointment under the provisions of the U.P. Government Servants Dying-in-Harness Rules, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) has been rejected by the Executive Officer of the Nagar Palika Parishad, Bulandshahr on the ground that the son of the deceased was working in the Nagar Palika Parishad, Bulandshahr.
(2.) LEARNED Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents had stated that the petition may be decided without calling for any counter affidavit as only the relevant Clause of the Rules in question have to be interpreted. It is, in such circumstances, that the petition is being finally decided without calling for any counter affidavit. The records indicate that the mother of the petitioner late Smt. Chandravati, who was working as a Sweeper in the Nagar Palika Parishad Bulandshahr, died-in-harness on 8th April, 2008 and immediately thereafter the petitioner moved an application on 11th April, 2008 for granting compassionate appointment under the provisions of the Rules. In the affidavit filed in support of the application, the petitioner stated that he was unemployed and had no source of income to maintain his family and infact has to look-after his wife and two minor sons and that his brother who was employed in the Nagar Palika Parishad was living separately and had no concern with the family. The impugned order recites that as the brother of the petitioner is working in the Nagar Palika Parishad, the petitioner is not entitled for compassionate appointment in view of the provisions of Rule 5(1) of the Rules.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submitted that the rejection of the claim of the petitioner for compassionate appointment merely on the ground that his brother is employed in the Nagar Palika Parishad is not in consonance with the provisions of Rule 5(1) of the Rules and, therefore, deserves to be set aside.;